Oh, those angry feminists...

[redqueen]

http://www.hugoschwyzer.net/2011/12/21/why-i-resigned-from-the-good-men-project/

(snip)

What bothered so many of us about the Twitter conversation about feminism was that Tom Matlack trotted out (as so many men do) that same tactic of attempting to silence women’s anger by suggesting that it poses a threat. Tom tweeted at Jenn Pozner that some men are afraid to speak up out of fear of female reprisals. Kind of being proven right here. Now Jennifer Pozner is a well-known feminist media critic, but she’s hardly in the position to carry out “reprisals” against anyone for speaking out, not that she would if she could. Nor was Jenn (or Kate Harding, or Amanda Marcotte) engaged in throwing stones, which didn’t stop Tom from describing the “pelting” he was taking from feminists.

A short while later, Tom tweeted I really thought the MRA guys were crazy until I engaged the wrath of the feminists. Insane. Though I doubt Tom thought this through clearly, this is the textbook “gaslighting” to which Yashar refers.* No feminist had called Tom a name equivalent to the names he (and I) are regularly called by MRAs (“mangina” is the epithet of choice from the Basement Boys); it didn’t matter. Jennifer and Amanda were “insane.”

Seemingly innocuous words often have a profound charge depending on how and by whom they’re used. Tom knows, surely, how problematic it is to use the word “boy” to refer to an African-American. It’s not a curse word in most contexts, but when used by a white person to refer to an adult black male, it’s steeped in the long and painful history of racism in America. What many men fail to understand is that accusing a woman of being insane or of engaging in reprisals merely because she’s expressing forceful disagreement has an equivalent ugliness. If that seems hyperbolic, google the word “hysteria.”

(snip)

There’s a conscious purpose to this sort of behavior. Joking about getting pelted (or putting on the football helmet) sends a message to women in the classroom – and online: “Tone it down. Take care of the men and their feelings. Don’t scare them off, because too much impassioned feminism is scary for guys.” And you know, as exasperating as it is, this kind of silencing language almost always works. Time and again, I’ve seen it work to silence women in the classroom, or at least cause them to worry about how to phrase things “just right” so as to protect the guys and their feelings. It’s a key anti-feminist strategy, even if that isn’t the actual intent of the men doing it — it forces women to become conscious caretakers of their male peers by subduing their own frustration and anger. It reminds young women that they should strive to avoid being one of those “angry feminists” who (literally) scares men off and drives them away.

More at link...

* The piece referred to: http://goodmenproject.com/featured-content/why-women-arent-crazy/

[JustAnotherGen]

1. You know . . .

We have men applauding the female heroine of The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo. She's sexually assaulted, and goes 'postal' in terms of retaliatory violence. It's a real 'feel good' story to these guys. *sigh*

They then got indignant when we responded in disagreement. As a matter of fact, a lot of them panty bunched (can I say that- or is it emasculating and hewts thar wittle feewings?).

They like women standing up for themselves post brutal sexual assault in fiction - but when it's a sustained diatribe as part of the society we live in - and women get pissed off . . . 'we're bad girls for hurting their widdle feelings'.

We can't win.

[ZombieHorde]

2. On the political forums of DU, there are people who are for President Obama,

and there are people who are against President Obama.

Different posters have different reasons for their opinions on President Obama, and many of the people on the "same side" contradict each other, even though each individual may be very consistent.

This causes the dilemma in your reply. "The other" is not a unified group. You want to argue against your opponents, but your opponents have different reasons, and different opinions on the subject at hand. This may cause some frustration.

One way to avoid this dilemma is to not argue against groups of people, but to rather argue against ideas, other arguments, individual people, or a unified organization. Otherwise, you're right. You can't win, because you'll just be screaming in the wind.

[redqueen]

3. Interestingly...

I did just what Hugo said in response to one particular poster on that thread.

I made sure to choose my words very delicately, so as not to ruin my chance at communicating with someone of the opposite sex.

[JustAnotherGen]

6. Noted redqueen

And well played. And with that "queen takes king". But king doesn't like it - so king panty bunches. Doh!

[seabeyond]

4. as every man in the movie sexualizes this "perfect victim" at every point

to the point of the gruesome graphic rape.

totally amazing. but by gosh, wimmen, dont be calling that shit out cause then as one male poster says, obviously we have sexual issues.

rah

good point and thanks.

[libodem]

5. I admire strong women

I'm a bit withdrawn and often can't or won't speak out. I gravitate towards strong roll models who do say what they feel and think. They lead by example. I took assertiveness training way back in the 80's. I had to unlearn reacting and falling into dispare over shity things my exhusband would say to me. I learned to say you could be right, made his insults meaningless. Drove him crazy that I could avert arguing by partially agreeing.
I like the article for validating that calling us over sensitive if we complain about unkind treatment, is, meant to discredit our perception. We need validation from each other that how we feel and think is real and alright.
I'm still trying to toughen up. Knowing that sometimes having someone remain calm, unpreturbed,and in control, while you scream and cry, is manipulative and mean, especially after they bait you into a melt down.
It happens. Not all quarrels are equally fought. We are not crazy.

[JustAnotherGen]

7. And in terms of emotional and verbal abuse

I like the article for validating that calling us over sensitive if we complain about unkind treatment, is, meant to discredit our perception.

It's classic abusive (emotional abuse) behavior. You might be better able to see it because you LIVED it with a man who used it to knock you down.

See - in general - there are men - who believe WE are an EXTENSION of them. We exist in a certain role in THEIR mind and if we break from the script we are:
Shrill
Overly Emotional
Mistaken
Not to be trusted
etc. etc.

The did it on that thread. And one tried to do it to me here.

Sorry buster! But I'm not falling for your psy-ops. Not only did my own FATHER not speak to me 'that way' but neither does my fiance. And he IS everything you 'think of' when you think Italian born man from Calabria living in the U.S. for ten years. Ironically - my old fashioned old world sweetheart also comes from a region/culture that says "When the woman speaks, the man listens, he holds her heart."

[libodem]

8. It is wonderful to be listened to

And heard.

[JustAnotherGen]

9. No problem

I will always try to HEAR what another woman is telling me when she tells it from her heart.